Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
This article displays in one automatically-generated column. View the full page to see article in its original form.

THE LEGAL LIBEL CASE.

WELLINGTON, September 6. Mr W. J\ Roydhouse, -proprietor of the ' Evening Press,' said he did not at the time the words were published oonsider that they reflected on Mr Bell. He accepted the responsibility of what waspnblished. He had no communication with Mr Jellicoe. By Sir R. Stout: Looking at the alleged libel now he did think that the paragraph referred to Mr Bell. Re-examined : He saw Mr Bell the evening after- the publication, when the

latter expressed great indignation at such a thing appearing in the paper, but he'did not appear to have made up his mind what course to follow. Mr Jellicoe said he wished to put a question to witnes3 to show that he had'made a different statement to his editor with regard to his opinion of the meaning of the -words complained of. He would then recall Mr Hawkins (the editor) to contradict him. Sir R. Stout said this amounted to Mr Jellicoe accusing his own witness of perjury. Mr Jellicoe then altered his expression to " making an inconsistent statement." The Judge refused leave to put the question. H. F. Allan said he did not consider the words applied to Mr Bell. Charles M'lntyre, baker, said the same thing.—By Sir B. Stout: No one had ever asked him his opinion till that moment, and he had never been asked about it either by Mr Jellicoe or his clerks. Great amusement was caused by Sir R. Stout's efforts to get the witness to admit that the words " those who conducted the prosecution " could only apply to Messrs Bell and Richmond—the counsel in the case—and some repartee occurred between counsel, which led the Judge to remark that it was below the dignity of the Court. The witness said that if he were shown that Mr Jellicoe had forwarded affidavits to the Government stating that Mr Bell himself had kept back evidence he would most likely change his opinion. John Holmes, jun., a tanner, reaiding at Kaiwarra, said he was subpoenaed by the prosecution to give evidence at Chemis's trial. He asked Mr Bell if ho would want him ; and after conversation Mr Bell said he should not call him. In cross-examina-tion he admitted that Mr Bell had Baid that witness might go, but his father would have to come instead. They were anxious that both should not be taken away from their work together. The case has been settled by Mr Jellicoe apologising and paying the costs. [From Our Own Correspondent.] WF.LLINGTON, September 6. The libel case was withdrawn on Mr Jellicoe paying costs, withdrawing his plea of justification, and saying that he never made any oharge against Mr Bell, and was sorry that his indignation of others made it appear that it was a reflection on him (Mr Bell). ________

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ESD18890906.2.21

Bibliographic details

THE LEGAL LIBEL CASE., Evening Star, Issue 8005, 6 September 1889

Word Count
466

THE LEGAL LIBEL CASE. Evening Star, Issue 8005, 6 September 1889

Working